5 ms·

I'm not convinced that we are in an AI bubble. In June 2007, Apple released the iPhone. Its stock price was $4.45 adjusted at that time. A year later, it was $6

I'm not convinced that we are in an AI bubble. In June 2007, Apple released the iPhone. Its stock price was $4.45 adjusted at that time. A year later, it was $6.50. 15 years later, it's now $153. We might be at the "$6.50 point" for AI.

throwawaaarrgh 4y ago
The iPhone is a real product, though. AI is more like an automated fortune teller. Just because your fortune sounds really convincing doesn't mean you should use it to buy lottery tickets.
- cuteboy19 4y ago
  What separates iphones from gpt4 as a service? Both are sold, both are products.
  - fhd2 4y ago
    I'd say a fundamental expansion in how much people use computers is what made smartphones a big shift. Maybe conversational generative AI will have the same effects, though I'm not too sure about that, people already use computers a lot.
  - MivLives 4y ago
    If you want to use that logic, why aren't we talking about banana farming? Also sold, also a product. The biggest difference is one is an ongoing service of questionable utility to most people in it's current form. iPhone is pretty instant. I have an ipod. I have a cellphone. Now I have one device. Chatgpt can't really help me on the day to day right now. I'm sure as hell not paying for it. In 2008 if I could have paid for it, the iPhone solved a real thing I was facing and I would have purchased it.
    - xvector 4y ago
      You might not pay for GPT-4 but my employer would gladly fork over many thousands for each of our tens of thousands of employees if we could train it on our own dataset and run it in-house. "In its current form" is also a weasel word. GPT-4 will replace hundreds of thousands of jobs over the next few years. It's already disrupted search, it'll soon disrupt most fields.
    - cuteboy19 4y ago
      "You" may not need it but many people are paying for it. Chatgpt Pro is pretty much a product in the same way icloud is
  - bitcoinmoney 4y ago
    I see iphone being used by everyone. Trains, buses, even beggars have iPhones. Do you honestly think AI will have that level of penetration? As in not as piggy backed on another platform? That’s the only way to extract a lot of value.
    - bushbaba 4y ago
      Already is. Nearly all the camera apps, social media feeds, etc are using ai/ml underneath the hood.
      - tokinonagare 4y ago
        There is a few nice improvements here and there like iOS handwriting recognition (similar function existed before AI) and clipping picture, but the products already existed for decades and AI only bring a few incremental novelty. On the other hand, algorithmic feeds ands ads have made social networks way worse than they were a decade ago, and spamming is now on another level thanks to GPT. So for now positive contributions of AI have been tiny and balanced by the negative ones.
    - xvector 4y ago
      GPT-4 style AI will encompass search and more. Search already has more penetration than the iPhone. AI will be far more ubiquitous than either.
    - ben_w 4y ago
      If they have an iPhone, they have: • Siri • A photos app with an AI that identifies image subjects and allows search by content • Computational photography • 17 language translation built-in, more if they get Google Translate • OCR when you tap on an image containing text • Voice-to-text transcription in the default keyboard • Fall detection and step counting powered by machine learning I think AI is likely to be like "3D" or "multimedia" in the 90s: it will be a sales buzzword until it's everywhere and therefore no longer a differentiator. 3D acceleration itself is still a big market, it's just that when everyone had a GPU (unlike my Performa 5200), the marketing shifted to which specific brand — NVIDIA, AMD, or whatever.
- ENGNR 4y ago
  How is AI today not a real product? The transformers paper sure, but I feel like Sam Altman productised it big time via “open” AI
  - Aromasin 4y ago
    I use ChatGPT, GitHub Copilot, Midjourney, Fireflies, Cleanup.Pictures, and a host of other AI-based tools in my daily workflow. I pay money for much of that. Anyone saying that these tools aren't products are, to be frank, deluded. For some reason, people are equating inaccuracy with redundancy. I can't fathom why people do so. I have a copy-writer, editor, artist, co-coder, photo editor, reporter, all at my finger tips. I need to give them advice on how to iterate their designs, and I know not to ask them for explicitly "correct" information, but they save me hours of my life, and hundreds in hiring costs. I can get templates, corrections, suggestions, tips, etcetera, in seconds. It's incredible.
- weinzierl 4y ago
  > Just because your fortune sounds really convincing doesn't mean you should use it to buy lottery tickets. You shouldn't buy lottery tickets anyway (and ChatGPT will tell you so, if you ask it). I have difficulty to understand where this negativity (not speaking of other downsides) regarding AI comes from. Yes, it talks BS sometimes, but so do people all the time. And, no, it's not the solution for all our problems, but for some things it is damn useful.
  - 2muchcoffeeman 4y ago
    I think there’s negativity because it gets hyped too much. We were supposed to have self driving cars all over the roads 2 years ago. We still don’t have anything close but now people are all “How is the way AI works any different from the way the brain works. Looks the same in my non-expert opinion!”.
    - ben_w 4y ago
      > We still don’t have anything close What we have isn't good enough, and I say that at someone who in 2009 expected cars that didn't have or need steering wheels to be purchasable by normal people in 2019[0], but the tech does exist and can drive you around. (And derive you around, as autocorrupt decided to inject a suitably ironic twist that I almost didn't spot). > but now people are all “How is the way AI works any different from the way the brain works. Looks the same in my non-expert opinion!”. In general: yes, totally. (Though I've only heard that specifically being used for "why stable diffusion is no worse than art school WRT copyright issues"). Always the way, though: "Consciousness is mysterious, quantum mechanics is mysterious, therefore they are the same thing". [0] This doesn't count: https://www.theverge.com/2023/3/8/23630358/tesla-steering-wheel-bolt-nhtsa-model-y https://www.theverge.com/2023/3/8/23630358/tesla-steering-wh... And neither does the Waymo taxi (even assuming the interior pictures I've seen were from the correct vehicle) because it's not for sale
    - weinzierl 4y ago
      I think there’s negativity because it gets hyped too much. You only can recognize the true revolutions in hindsight. I remember well the people who said the Internet was overhyped and it's just a novelty that will go away. In hindsight it was not hyped enough. My personal opinion is that what we see in AI is more like the early Internet than the hype about self-driving cars. What I see more of an issue is that some people expect AI to solve all their problems and when they are disappointed they overlook that it solves some problems better than anything we had before.
- vasco 4y ago
  You're saying this as if people weren't saying worse things about the iPhone than you're saying about AI. Steve ballmer said it was an expensive piece of junk without a keyboard that nobody would want. You just have to google iPhone and iPad critics from that time period to see that you're having your own Ballmer moment. If you're right or not only time will tell.
- gwd 4y ago
  > AI is more like an automated fortune teller. I think you just haven't seen the potentially revolutionary applications. My side project is developing a tool to help me learn Chinese. Last night I asked gpt-3.5-turbo to: 1. Take the existing text which had Arabic numerals in it (e.g., "2006年" for "the year 2006" and "30万" for "300,000") and replace them with Chinese characters as they would be read (i.e., "二零零六年" for the year, "三十万" for the number) 2. Segment the text with some specific parameters (i.e., segment "二零零六" as four separate words, rather than one big word) 3. Convert the whole thing to pinyin, with specific parameters (don't group multi-character words and don't capitalize proper nouns). I got the output I wanted with 5-10 minutes of playing around with it; I could theoretically use those prompts to process my entire library of study content. Do you have any idea how long it would take me to code something like that up?
- golergka 4y ago
  Most of my non-programmer white-collar friends use ChatGPT daily for their work. They are aware that it hallucinates stuff, so they don't ask it factual questions. Instead, they use it to transform existing data. It's wonderful at that task and saves them a lot of hours.
Keirmot 4y ago
You're missing two major stock splits there, one 4-1 and another of 7-1. without those splits apple stock would be much, much higher
- sokoloff 4y ago
  They correctly used split—adjusted figures. The nominal share price in 2007 was in the hundreds (28x the figure they cited).
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- senttoschool 4y ago
  I did use adjusted prices.

throwawaaarrgh 4y ago

The iPhone is a real product, though. AI is more like an automated fortune teller. Just because your fortune sounds really convincing doesn't mean you should use it to buy lottery tickets.

cuteboy19 4y ago
What separates iphones from gpt4 as a service? Both are sold, both are products.
- fhd2 4y ago
  I'd say a fundamental expansion in how much people use computers is what made smartphones a big shift. Maybe conversational generative AI will have the same effects, though I'm not too sure about that, people already use computers a lot.
- MivLives 4y ago
  If you want to use that logic, why aren't we talking about banana farming? Also sold, also a product. The biggest difference is one is an ongoing service of questionable utility to most people in it's current form. iPhone is pretty instant. I have an ipod. I have a cellphone. Now I have one device. Chatgpt can't really help me on the day to day right now. I'm sure as hell not paying for it. In 2008 if I could have paid for it, the iPhone solved a real thing I was facing and I would have purchased it.
  - xvector 4y ago
    You might not pay for GPT-4 but my employer would gladly fork over many thousands for each of our tens of thousands of employees if we could train it on our own dataset and run it in-house. "In its current form" is also a weasel word. GPT-4 will replace hundreds of thousands of jobs over the next few years. It's already disrupted search, it'll soon disrupt most fields.
  - cuteboy19 4y ago
    "You" may not need it but many people are paying for it. Chatgpt Pro is pretty much a product in the same way icloud is
- bitcoinmoney 4y ago
  I see iphone being used by everyone. Trains, buses, even beggars have iPhones. Do you honestly think AI will have that level of penetration? As in not as piggy backed on another platform? That’s the only way to extract a lot of value.
  - bushbaba 4y ago
    Already is. Nearly all the camera apps, social media feeds, etc are using ai/ml underneath the hood.
    - tokinonagare 4y ago
      There is a few nice improvements here and there like iOS handwriting recognition (similar function existed before AI) and clipping picture, but the products already existed for decades and AI only bring a few incremental novelty. On the other hand, algorithmic feeds ands ads have made social networks way worse than they were a decade ago, and spamming is now on another level thanks to GPT. So for now positive contributions of AI have been tiny and balanced by the negative ones.
  - xvector 4y ago
    GPT-4 style AI will encompass search and more. Search already has more penetration than the iPhone. AI will be far more ubiquitous than either.
  - ben_w 4y ago
    If they have an iPhone, they have: • Siri • A photos app with an AI that identifies image subjects and allows search by content • Computational photography • 17 language translation built-in, more if they get Google Translate • OCR when you tap on an image containing text • Voice-to-text transcription in the default keyboard • Fall detection and step counting powered by machine learning I think AI is likely to be like "3D" or "multimedia" in the 90s: it will be a sales buzzword until it's everywhere and therefore no longer a differentiator. 3D acceleration itself is still a big market, it's just that when everyone had a GPU (unlike my Performa 5200), the marketing shifted to which specific brand — NVIDIA, AMD, or whatever.
ENGNR 4y ago
How is AI today not a real product? The transformers paper sure, but I feel like Sam Altman productised it big time via “open” AI
- Aromasin 4y ago
  I use ChatGPT, GitHub Copilot, Midjourney, Fireflies, Cleanup.Pictures, and a host of other AI-based tools in my daily workflow. I pay money for much of that. Anyone saying that these tools aren't products are, to be frank, deluded. For some reason, people are equating inaccuracy with redundancy. I can't fathom why people do so. I have a copy-writer, editor, artist, co-coder, photo editor, reporter, all at my finger tips. I need to give them advice on how to iterate their designs, and I know not to ask them for explicitly "correct" information, but they save me hours of my life, and hundreds in hiring costs. I can get templates, corrections, suggestions, tips, etcetera, in seconds. It's incredible.
weinzierl 4y ago
> Just because your fortune sounds really convincing doesn't mean you should use it to buy lottery tickets. You shouldn't buy lottery tickets anyway (and ChatGPT will tell you so, if you ask it). I have difficulty to understand where this negativity (not speaking of other downsides) regarding AI comes from. Yes, it talks BS sometimes, but so do people all the time. And, no, it's not the solution for all our problems, but for some things it is damn useful.
- 2muchcoffeeman 4y ago
  I think there’s negativity because it gets hyped too much. We were supposed to have self driving cars all over the roads 2 years ago. We still don’t have anything close but now people are all “How is the way AI works any different from the way the brain works. Looks the same in my non-expert opinion!”.
  - ben_w 4y ago
    > We still don’t have anything close What we have isn't good enough, and I say that at someone who in 2009 expected cars that didn't have or need steering wheels to be purchasable by normal people in 2019[0], but the tech does exist and can drive you around. (And derive you around, as autocorrupt decided to inject a suitably ironic twist that I almost didn't spot). > but now people are all “How is the way AI works any different from the way the brain works. Looks the same in my non-expert opinion!”. In general: yes, totally. (Though I've only heard that specifically being used for "why stable diffusion is no worse than art school WRT copyright issues"). Always the way, though: "Consciousness is mysterious, quantum mechanics is mysterious, therefore they are the same thing". [0] This doesn't count: https://www.theverge.com/2023/3/8/23630358/tesla-steering-wheel-bolt-nhtsa-model-y https://www.theverge.com/2023/3/8/23630358/tesla-steering-wh... And neither does the Waymo taxi (even assuming the interior pictures I've seen were from the correct vehicle) because it's not for sale
  - weinzierl 4y ago
    I think there’s negativity because it gets hyped too much. You only can recognize the true revolutions in hindsight. I remember well the people who said the Internet was overhyped and it's just a novelty that will go away. In hindsight it was not hyped enough. My personal opinion is that what we see in AI is more like the early Internet than the hype about self-driving cars. What I see more of an issue is that some people expect AI to solve all their problems and when they are disappointed they overlook that it solves some problems better than anything we had before.
vasco 4y ago
You're saying this as if people weren't saying worse things about the iPhone than you're saying about AI. Steve ballmer said it was an expensive piece of junk without a keyboard that nobody would want. You just have to google iPhone and iPad critics from that time period to see that you're having your own Ballmer moment. If you're right or not only time will tell.
gwd 4y ago
> AI is more like an automated fortune teller. I think you just haven't seen the potentially revolutionary applications. My side project is developing a tool to help me learn Chinese. Last night I asked gpt-3.5-turbo to: 1. Take the existing text which had Arabic numerals in it (e.g., "2006年" for "the year 2006" and "30万" for "300,000") and replace them with Chinese characters as they would be read (i.e., "二零零六年" for the year, "三十万" for the number) 2. Segment the text with some specific parameters (i.e., segment "二零零六" as four separate words, rather than one big word) 3. Convert the whole thing to pinyin, with specific parameters (don't group multi-character words and don't capitalize proper nouns). I got the output I wanted with 5-10 minutes of playing around with it; I could theoretically use those prompts to process my entire library of study content. Do you have any idea how long it would take me to code something like that up?
golergka 4y ago
Most of my non-programmer white-collar friends use ChatGPT daily for their work. They are aware that it hallucinates stuff, so they don't ask it factual questions. Instead, they use it to transform existing data. It's wonderful at that task and saves them a lot of hours.

Keirmot 4y ago

You're missing two major stock splits there, one 4-1 and another of 7-1. without those splits apple stock would be much, much higher

sokoloff 4y ago
They correctly used split—adjusted figures. The nominal share price in 2007 was in the hundreds (28x the figure they cited).
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
senttoschool 4y ago
I did use adjusted prices.